User:GwenJ210/Ragnhild Tregagås/Smtayl5 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

GwenJ210


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GwenJ210/Ragnhild_Tregag%C3%A5s?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ragnhild Tregagås

Evaluate the drafted changes
• For the cousin Bård, does he have a last name? If yes, it should be included.

• The sentence "Hiding in Bård and Bergljot's bedroom, Tregagås verbally cursed them" is a little confusing contextually. Could the lovers hear her? How did she hide? Was she caught? How did she get in there? Etc.

• In the first paragraph after the spells, I recommend mentioning if they had no children since you mentioned the man being impotent in the first sentence. It's good to follow-up with the proof

• I wonder why Tregagås confessed before a trial? Maybe bragging because she was so forth coming in the trial. Do we know if torture was used for the final confession? I know it often was back in the day so confessions may be less credible if so.

•"fast at twice a week" sounds odd

-Maybe list some of the holy places you reference

-Change "Christianity had reighned in Norway 300 years before Tregagas.." to "Christianity had reigned in Norway since/for 300 years before Tregagas.."

- "The accusations against Raghild were sexual in nature.." there some issues with misplaced modifiers in this sentence. It sounds like the accusations were sexual, as in they were spoken or delivered in a sexual manner. Easy fix, you could change it to "the crimes that she was accused of were sexual in nature" or something along those lines, as long as 'sexual' is modifying 'crimes'.

I think it would be interesting to do a section of her being represented in media. I found a song called Ragnhild Tregagas by Fuimadane.

I would also think about adding a "Life" section, assuming her life was not all about witchcraft (It very well could have been). You mentioned she had a husband: did they have children? What was his reaction?

This has a solid, wikipedia neutral tone. The information that is provided is done in a clear and concise way, and the sources seem to be credible from what I can tell. The lead is really good. Most of my feedback is just nitpicking because it is well done. This is definitely a HUGE improvement to the original Wikipedia page, it was a smart move to pick the topic because it is very interesting and was so poorly covered.